Mattie wrote:
Wickedhippy, that is how your posts are coming across, they are aggressive and attacking and in some cases insulting.

Well, that certainly wasn't my intention - and if I came off attacking anyone, I apologize it was interpreted that way. I was just presenting the "facts" on my side of the board. I was also defending my opinion the way others were defending thiers. I have noticed that there are a lot of people on here that like to disagree, which is fine, but it's hard to interpret what they're emotions are. I didn't attack anyone personally, yet others were personally attacking me by using my name, etc...

If this is the welcome from forum members, I'd just rather stay away from the forum altogether. I didn't realize it was exclusive.

I beg to differ. Just go back to your first post on this thread. And you're STILL doing it with the comment that you "obviously" read more than I do.

- just posting the "other" side of the opinion.

You weren't posting the other side of the opinion. You were refuting what I linked as if all of your info was fact, period, with no question.

Being new to the forum doesn't mean I don't have a say in things like you do

No it certainly doesn't. But the way in which you worded your posts when you don't even know how we've discussed neutering over the years here was really rude. And you can go back to any of my posts. I am usually quite polite. But when I'm spoken to like an idiot I will stand up for myself.

There are people here who keep their dogs entire and have no problems. I agree that spaying and neutering is advisable for population control. BUT I am really not a fan of making blanket statements that neutering will cure behavior problems. Especially since there are studies that show both sides.

My first post on this forum didn't call anyone out specifically - I didn't post anything on my opinion that you (and others) hadn't posted to prove thiers.

As for "refuting", that's what is being done back and forth.

Even if it's something that's been discussed "over the years" - there are new people coming in everyday that have different opinions, that are just as allowed as something that was talked about years ago. Things change remember?

I don't think anyone here is an idiot. And I will defend myself as well when ganged up on, just as anyone else would.

This is an unusual forum, we do speak our minds on here but we don't do personal attacks. We love to discuss various things about dogs and sometimes they get heated but that us being human. We can learn a lot about dogs and their behaviour by these discussion especially when people do disagree, we expect them to say why they disagree, it is all part of the learning.

This is very misleading Scientifically Proven FACTS!!!! You put it in bold and put facts in capitals, in fact that just gives one side of the argument and is that person's ideas of neutering so not Facts.

In another you put "EDUCATED and have SIGNIFICANT" this looks like we are not educated people and have no significants, I am not going any further because I am not writing this to attack you just to explain things from our point of view.

We love to discuss, we love to learn other people's views, but we also expect to be put right if we are wrong, get answers when we ask questions and if we step out of like get a kick up the backside.

Everyone's views are significant on here because they are all their experiences, what works for one doesn't work for another but we have so many ways that have worked there is a lot for owners to work with.

I hope that explains things, we are happy to discuss anything that you want to, just ask and you are welcome to give your opinion.

I guess my thoughts on the subject are passionate, and that is why I use bolding and caps - not to attack, just to strongly present my side. And there is science on both sides, but I tend to agree strongly with the spaying/neutering side.

Thank you for explaining your intrepretation of my posts - but let me assure everyone that it wasn't to attack anyone personally. Like I said, I feel very strongly about this - as I'm sure you feel strongly about your beliefs.

wickedhippy wrote:My first post on this forum didn't call anyone out specifically - I didn't post anything on my opinion that you (and others) hadn't posted to prove thiers.

As for "refuting", that's what is being done back and forth.

You did speak down to us on your first post, Noobs started this thread to ask Victoria why she still says neutering solves all problems, there is nothing wrong with that. You posted a link and said it was fact, when in fact it wasn't.

Even if it's something that's been discussed "over the years" - there are new people coming in everyday that have different opinions, that are just as allowed as something that was talked about years ago. Things change remember?

Yes there are new people coming on here asking question but usually they don't insult the members, everyone on here is a volunteer who give our time and experiences free to help others, we will not tollerate being spoken to the way you have with us, you are new, you don't know how the board works yet you give the impression that we have to do as you say. That may work in other places but won't here.

I don't think anyone here is an idiot. And I will defend myself as well when ganged up on, just as anyone else would.

You certainly gave the impression that you think we are all idiots, if you had been better mannered and not upset the members, who like you have the right to defend themselves, then you wouldn't have felt ganged up on. It was you who attacked us not us that attacked you.

wickedhippy wrote:I guess my thoughts on the subject are passionate, and that is why I use bolding and caps - not to attack, just to strongly present my side. And there is science on both sides, but I tend to agree strongly with the spaying/neutering side.

Thank you for explaining your intrepretation of my posts - but let me assure everyone that it wasn't to attack anyone personally. Like I said, I feel very strongly about this - as I'm sure you feel strongly about your beliefs.

I recently adopted a dog who was going to be euthanized because she failed the "hand test" at the shelter. To give you some background, she had been a stray for a good amount of time in snowy, cold NY state in a large city. She is a small dog (13 lbs) and came to the shelter so severely matted up that it took them over an hour to shave her. So, you get the picture of how incredibly compromised she was and can imagine what this little thing had to do to survive on the streets....and then we give her a death sentence for normal doggy behavior that she had to use to survive. To top all this off, she is only about a year old now according to the vet, so she was just a puppy when she was dumped.
Fortunately, a local rescue group got wind of the shelter's decision and she went into foster care. Her incredibly caring foster mom worked with her and in less than 2 weeks rectified the problem. I have now adopted her and she had a couple very minor episodes the first day, but I reinforced the training and it is now almost three weeks later and she is fine. I initially fed her and my dog separately, but but being both young dogs, they gravitated toward each other and there hasn't been a problem. Her and my dog now share each other's dishes, they share chew toys, I can remove her bowl without a reaction and I can take anything out of her mouth. It's incredible how resilient and trusting dogs are...and she is proof that food guarding is an issue that can be corrected. Trusting that food is now plentiful I think is a big part of this.

I'm new to this forum, but wanted to add my recent experience- love the show and the focus on positive training!

Noobs wrote:

minkee wrote:

RSPCA also tests for food aggression by putting a fake hand in a dog's dish to provoke a reaction.

This is quite literally incredible. I don't want to believe it.

This is a common procedure in rescues, sadly.

Last edited by caroline919 on Thu Jul 28, 2011 5:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

I recently adopted a dog who was going to be euthanized because she failed the "hand test" at the shelter. To give you some background, she had been a stray for a good amount of time in snowy, cold NY state in a large city. She is a small dog (13 lbs) and came to the shelter so severely matted up that it took them over an hour to shave her. So, you get the picture of how incredibly compromised she was and can imagine what this little thing had to do to survive on the streets....and then we give her a death sentence for normal doggy behavior that she had to use to survive. To top all this off, she is only about a year old now according to the vet, so she was just a puppy when she was dumped.
Fortunately, a local rescue group got wind of the shelter's decision and she went into foster care. Her incredibly caring foster mom worked with her and in less than 2 weeks rectified the problem. I have now adopted her and she had a couple very minor episodes the first day, but I reinforced the training and it is now almost three weeks later and she is fine. I initially fed her and my dog seperately, but but being both young dogs, they gravitated toward each other and there hasn't been a problem. Her and my dog now share each other's dishes, they share chew toys, I can remove her bowl without a reaction and I can take anything out of her mouth. It's incredible how resilient and trusting dogs are...and she is proof that food guarding is an issue that can be corrected. Trusting that food is now plentiful I think is a big part of this.

I'm new to this forum, but wanted to add my recent experience- love the show and the focus on positive training!

Noobs wrote:

minkee wrote:

RSPCA also tests for food aggression by putting a fake hand in a dog's dish to provoke a reaction.